When people talk about Disney princesses, there’s this idea that they’ve evolved into these feminist icons. Snow White scrubbed the floors, Belle read her books, Moana set sail across the ocean, and now apparently little girls have a full spectrum of role models. It’s a nice story, but let’s be real, Disney haven’t been leading the revolution here, they’ve just been very good at responding to it.
Take the early days – Snow White and Cinderella were huge successes, both passive heroines who got rewarded for being good, pretty, and patient. That worked in the 1930s and 50s because it reflected what people wanted to see. Then Sleeping Beauty came along in 1959 and didn’t do as well at the box office. Aurora barely spoke and, to be honest, audiences had moved on. Disney’s solution? To avoid another princess flop, they just stopped making them for thirty years.
When Ariel showed up in 1989, she was rebellious, curious, a bit stroppy even, and she marked a shift. But Disney didn’t suddenly discover feminism in the 80s. Ariel was simply a reflection of the changing conversations about women’s independence at the time. Then along came Belle (my personal favourite as a child mainly because she read books and rolled her eyes at Gaston which, at five years old, I thought was badass). Then Jasmine, Pocahontas, and Mulan. Each of them was slightly braver, cleverer, or more defiant, and also the first foray in to representation but still always neatly aligned with what audiences were ready to accept.
Here’s the thing: Disney didn’t invent those ideas. They were late to the party. Pocahontas, for example, was released in the 90s when conversations about Native American rights and representation had already been happening for decades. Moana is praised for being independent, but the story still starts in a patriarchal society and feels more about ecological activism than feminism. While Frozen blew up globally with Elsa’s “you don’t need a man” arc, by the time it came out, young girls already had Hermione Granger and Katniss Everdeen as role models. Disney were playing catch-up, not breaking ground.
Feminism, for me, means choice, having rights and options, not chasing a myth of having it all. Women can be homemakers or astronauts, or anything else. That choice matters. Our society has changed in two decades, the Me?Too movement has opened the floodgates for the female voice, strong females advocating widely.
I’ll never forget the example of Queen Elizabeth showing power, grace and defying expectations like when she drove herself when a crown Prince from Saudi Arabia, a country where women can’t drive came to visit. Taking him on a hair raising drive through the grounds of Balmoral. A direct and unconventional approach to feminism – iconic!
I think that’s why I can never quite get on board with people calling Disney “feminist trailblazers.” I’m not even a huge Disney fan. Don’t get me wrong I’ve seen a lot of the movies and enjoyed them, but I can’t help but feel that a lot of their decisions feel like box-ticking or even tokenism – the live action remakes especially.
I’m going to say it, even if no one else agrees. Sometimes it feels like characters are cast in deliberately controversial ways just to generate headlines. Also…. Why not write new stories? History is full of extraordinary women whose tales are begging to be told. Recycling the same princesses over and over feels lazy. We know the stories and they always involve the mantra that a happily ever after needs to include a prince or in Elsa’s case ends up apparently alone in the forest forever.
Representation matters, of course. I remember feeling like I could identify with Pocahontas because of my own mixed heritage and dark hair. She was the first princess I felt I could actually look like when I dressed up. But that makes me even more frustrated with how Disney sometimes cherry-picks and sanitises cultural stories without giving back to the communities they take from. When you’ve got the global influence that Disney has, I think you have a responsibility to get it right. I do think they have learnt and evolved, and it seems for the most part that their latest attempt with Moana seems to be more appropriate. Moana herself states that she isn’t a princess, but the daughter of a chief, she appears on the Disney website as a princess but she’s rejected that title herself.
For what it’s worth, I’m working this because I do think it matters. Disney is entertainment, but it’s also one of the biggest cultural machines in the world. Millions of children consume these stories. If girls are encouraged to play at being Elsa, are we talking to them about the fact she’s a queen making difficult decisions, or are we just braiding their hair and setting a plastic tiara on their heads. All too often we as society teach girls to be feminine and aspire to be beautiful, but we do not praise independence or strength. Disney doesn’t have to lead revolutions but when you have that much reach, you do have a duty not to misrepresent women or reduce them to pretty dresses and happily-ever-afters.
I do see girls embracing princesses and dresses. There isn’t anything wrong with that. Im not saying we all need to burn our bras and grow the hair under our arm pits. I see girls playing football, studying science, leading. This feminine power, intelligence and strength is not mutually exclusive. But that’s on society, not Disney. Disney still courts controversy.
Disney have always followed the money. They give the public what it already wants, not what it needs to hear. They’re great at rebranding themselves as progressive when really, they’re just reacting to the world outside their animation studios. The real groundbreaking work the activism, the feminist debates, the cultural shifts has always been happening elsewhere. Disney just waited until it was safe, and profitable, to cash in on it.